Can the media be trusted?
Yes it can be
Side Score: 14
|
 |
No it can't be
Side Score: 22
|
|
|
|
|
This is view that is being propagated in the USA in order to deny the facts of what Trump is doing. Speak against Trump? Its fake news!!! Are we interested why in one breath he says he thinks Russia hacked the US and in the next that sanctions against Russia should be lifted for example? Nah... fake news!!! Left wing nonsense. When you say you cant trust media.. you are saying you cant trust any information that is reported. How else are you going to decide? By a gut feeling? If you worry about how biase the news is, the answer is not to find a news source that fits your political ideology but rather than gather information from a variety of sources. Side: Yes it can be
I actually saw him say it in a speech. He said he has no problem lifting sanctions on Russia if its of benefit to the US. Yes youre right though, he quite that stupid enough to overtly lift all sanctions immediately. Taking a primary source: https://www.treasury.gov/resource- His government has just issued this allowing the Russia version of the FBI to buy ICT products (including those used for hacking) from US companies. Is okay considering that Russia has been launching cyber attacks against the US? You will notice that this licence does not extend to the reexportation to the Crimea. The legislation clearly covers technology that is a recognised security risk. This is just the surface though. With a more tactful leader, we wouldn't have been able to gather any information on his thoughts about Russia. As it is though it is quite apparent that he really doesn't care if Russia hacks the US so long as there is a good result out of it. Im not sure if the good result is for him or the US economy. Perhaps both. Side: Yes it can be
1
point
When you have stations like Fox news, CNN, MSNBC, etc giving out completely half assed "facts" you've got a problem. When the autistic kid was kidnapped and tortured in Chicago the one reporter from CNN had the nerve to say "i don't think this is an act of evil" and other news sources practically defending the riots at the inauguration and at berkly as "protests" When the media says that BLM is just protesting, but in reality they're a violet organization you've got problems i the media Side: No it can't be
There is only ONE network that tells you what they WANT you to hear. That's the one who is having so much trouble hanging on to their female "talking heads" ....and their upper management. The other networks seem to come up with the same "facts". They usually don't like "alternate facts". Side: Yes it can be
HEY, you outlaw, This is still America (for a short time at least). The "majority" (and growing), still has an opinion and you'll get that in 4 years (or less). That is, unless America becomes the TRUMP/Breitbart MONARCHY! Then there'll be fewer of U.S. left, and fewer of you. But, that could come to pass if WE don't fight to KEEP America! Hopefully, after that, we can "Progress" and once again leave the Dark Ages behind! Side: Yes it can be
1
point
You have just proven that the media cannot be proven. I had to double check to see if you were actually on the supporting side, because what you just said clearly shows that the media cannot be trusted. They cater to their audience, to the views, which means they will tell the audience what they want to hear or what they think they want to hear so they can get more views, truth be damned. You even say 'even if what is said is shy of the truth' which is the biggest contradiction in your statement.You're trying to say that the media cannot be trusted, and yet you outright say they lie? So how can they be trusted? Side: No it can't be
1
point
I meant that someone can trust the media. You can trust them. Allow me to restate my position. You can place your trust in the media. That is an option anyone can make. All media isn't false. All media isn't truthful. You have to believe what you want and trust who you want. So yes, the media "can" be trusted. Side: Yes it can be
|
2
points
1
point
You can't trust anything the mainstream media says. "45 percent of the claims we’ve checked from NBC and MSNBC pundits and on-air personalities have been rated Mostly False, False or Pants on Fire. At Fox and Fox News Channel, that same number is now 58 percent. At CNN, it’s 22 percent." source When the one that lies the least still lies one out of every five times, you know there is a major problem with the trustworthiness of the mainstream media. Side: No it can't be
Sadly I don't trust any source of information anymore. It's all such a mess. But I'll add this, I would much rather trust a well established public traditional news source, like the NYT or Washington Post or WSJ, or NBC evening news, than I would a blog or Facebook or one with avowed political purpose for it's existence. Yet, basically I trust nothing anymore. Side: No it can't be
So let's look at the totally insane statement you just made. I'm quoting you -" Sadly I don't trust any source of information anymore. It's all such a mess. I would much rather trust a well established public traditional news source, like the NYT or Washington Post or WSJ, or NBC evening news. Yet, basically I trust nothing anymore." Who is to follow the insanity i just qouted you as saying ? Side: Yes it can be
Not in the slightest. When the media says silly things like Call of Duty teaches you how to use guns and makes you into a mass murder, that's when you should be realising, if you haven't already, that the media simply tells lies and warps the truth for their own agenda. The media has their own agenda, and is willing to bend the truth or not present all the facts. After all, they wouldn't exist without viewers, so they do what they need to get more viewers and have more influence. Side: No it can't be
This obviously depends on the newspaper or TV outlet. But you should always take every story with a pinch of salt. Ninety percent of the media in the USA is owned by just six corporations: GE, News-Corp (owns Fox), Disney, Viacom, Time Warner (owns CNN) and CBS. The media also cannot be trusted to report every single story. I've mentioned before how US news doesn't tend to report so much on other countries, whereas British newspapers are full of international news. The US election was reported across the world; the British election didn't even get a cursory look-in. It's one reason why a lot of Americans tend to have less knowledge about countries outside the US. The media just doesn't treat the rest of us like we exist. Tabloids tend not to report important news. Further to this, the media can be uninformed or downright misleading. For example, Fox News ran a story about Barack Obama wearing "Islamic garb" in a photograph of him as a young man. They apparently didn't know this "Islamic garb" was in fact Kenyan traditional dress. A British tabloid ran the story that 1 in 5 British Muslims supported jihad. It got into a lot of hot water after it was found to have significantly distorted the facts, and was widely panned as "irresponsible journalism". As to whether you can trust the media for other things, just look at how they hacked phones at The News of the World - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsInternationalphonehackingscandal Side: No it can't be
Any and every source of information you receive should be treated with skepticism and challenged, whether it's a newspaper, a Facebook post, a conversation with your co-worker, whatever. It's your responsibility as an individual to test and sort out and come to your own conclusions. But with that said, media like the NYT and WSJ and Washington Post is 10 fold more trustworthy than devoted propagana sites like Breitbart, or web blogs, or Create Debate posts. And if you think it's the opposite then you're part of that group none of us should be trusting. Side: No it can't be
1
point
Even CNN doesn't believe the Russia hoax, they continue to report on it because "it's good for the ratings." Side: No it can't be
|
